Abstract

In State v. Wall, the Arizona Supreme Court unanimously held that a defendant does not forfeit his right to a lesser-included-offense instruction when he pursues an all-or-nothing defense. Under the Arizona Rules of Criminal Procedure, a defendant is entitled to a lesser-included-offense instruction whenever the evidence in the case supports that instruction. Thus, a court must instruct the jury on the lesser-included crime when the facts of the case could allow a reasonable jury to find that the lesser, but not the greater offense, had been committed. When given, the lesser-included-offense jury instruction allows the jury to find the defendant guilty of the lesser offense should the prosecution fail to prove an element of the offense originally charged. This ensures that the jury does not find the defendant guilty of a crime the prosecution has failed to prove simply because the jury believes the defendant is guilty of something. The court's ruling reaffirmed that the only questions a court should ask in determining whether to approve a lesser-included-offense instruction are (1) whether the requested instruction is a lesser-included offense of the crime charged and (2) whether the instruction is supported by the evidence.

How to Cite